>As a matter of fact you are, but it is understandable. You have accepted as>true the creationist claim that "macroevolution" is the only true form of>evolution. Since "macroevolution" does involve more or less irreversible>change, it is natural for you to assume that evolution as a whole requires>irreversible change. However, "microevolution" is also evolution, even>though changes here are not always irreversible.

Irreversibility has long been recognized as a general characteristic of
evolution, micro and macro. Dollo's Law, isn't it?

But I can see that my belief in macroevolution influences me in this. If I
were wedded to microevolution, then the slight variations I see among
populations would seem to me the very stuff of evolution, as it did for
Darwin.

BTW, I don't think macro is the "only true form of evolution." And I don't
think creationists believe in macroevolution; they believe in special creation.